U.S., Mexico, Canada 'harmonizing' policies

WorldNetDaily ^ | January 15, 2007

[NapkinUser]

Ping.

[Brad’s Gramma]

I'm disappointed...not surprised, but disappointed.

[calcowgirl]

2005 Report to Leaders

2006 Report to Leaders

[ArcadeQuarters]

Our country is being destroyed by our own leaders.

[hedgetrimmer]

You all might want to read this.

[processing please hold]

If you think this is bad, get a load of this thread.

Bush to welcome 10,000 saudi students to American Schools

[CharlesWayneCT]

So, assuming the new regulations correctly implement all existing U.S. laws, what is the problem with those regulations being crafted so as to facility free trade with our nearest neighbors?

It's like complaining about two states deciding they are going to standardized the rail line widths so that the trains don't have to have their wheels swapped out at the border.

So, is this "re-write" simply changing the track widths, or is it something serious. That's the information that is necessary to understand if this is a real problem.


For example, some were upset in a thread a couple of days ago about a railroad company wanting to eliminate safety inspections on one of their trains in the United States, claiming the inspection replicated one done in Mexico for the same train.

A regulatory change eliminating the redundant inspections would be a good thing, something that should be supported by limited-government private-enterprise conservatives. But many were simply upset that "mexicans" would be inspecting our trains, and talked about how corrupt "mexicans" were and how they couldn't be trusted.

Some got confused and thought this was about cargo inspections, and bemoaned how the terrorists would buy off the "mexicans" and ship WMDs into the country.

So in the end, we had conservatives taking the side of the AFL-CIO, who of course opposed the regulatory change because they wanted to keep their union employees working on unnecessary tasks so they'd keep getting union dues to use to elect democrats to destroy our country.

So is this regulatory changes that facility the free market and remove unncessary burdens from private enterprise, or is it something else?

[Czar]

"The reports discuss the SPP's trilateral modification of administrative rules and regulation under the rubric of "integrating" and "harmonizing" into a "North American" structure what previously were administrative rules and regulations of the U.S., Canada, and Mexico."

So, unelected and unaccountable NWO/NAU busybodies are going to hand us brand new administrative rules and regulations they expect us to follow, are they?

We shall see.

[SwinneySwitch]

Sweet Adeline


Sweet Adeline,
My Adeline,
At night, dear heart,
For you I pine;
In all my dreams,
Your fair face beams.
You're the flower of my heart,
Sweet Adeline.

/sarc

[Kenny Bunk]

Everyone relax. I am sure the government has a perfectly rational explanation for all of this. OK now?

Para inglés, oprime número dos, por favor.

[calcowgirl]

I am sure the government has a perfectly rational explanation for all of this.

Trade trumps sovereignty? Oh, wait... you said "rational."

[hedgetrimmer]

This is the end game for "free trade". It is what the globalists will do to make the destruction of the US economy through "free trade" more 'palatable' to the American people.

Finance committee head urges fast-track renewal, global services accord

When it comes to helping workers, we must make the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) program, which expires in September, more reflective of today's innovative economy.

TAA is our commitment that America will provide wage and health benefits while trade-displaced workers retool, retrain, and find better jobs. And a renewed TAA must do what today's program does not. TAA must be available to the eight out of 10 American workers who make their money in services professions; and it must apply to all workers displaced by trade, not just those affected by free-trade agreements. In fact, we should seriously examine the idea of expanding TAA into "GAA" -- Globalization Adjustment Assistance that would offer benefits not only to workers displaced by trade, but to those displaced by all aspects of globalization.

Then see what Robert Rubins public/private NGO has to say about health care.

Elect gobalist "free traders" to your government and you will get global socialism.

[hedgetrimmer]

A new catchphrase for your research:

"Globalization Adjustment Assistance"

See why the democrats and republicans support it.

Look to see who's forming the South American Union, if you're curious.

[1rudeboy]

I posted one of these SPP threads a long time ago about how one of the direct results of this agreement was the standardization of civil aviation beacons between Mexico, the U.S., and Canada. I was then informed that this is a bad idea because it will make it easier for the Mexican Air Force to attack the continental U.S.

It's a shame that the national security argument, which is really the strongest argument for or against anything that exists, is diminished in such a fashion. I mean, if one does not want a Spanish-led consortium operating a tollroad in Indiana, fine. Just don't explain to me that the Spanish will interdict U.S. troop movements in case of national emergency.

In the same fashion, don't simply point at a regulation and shout "international cooperation, bad!" There's a reason automobile bumpers are the same distance off the ground. Think about it.

[cinives]

So you want to outsource our border security to the same country whose soldiers support Mexican drug lords when running drugs over our border ?

You think that's a good idea ? If you think our unions are corrupt (and they are), you don't even begin to understand the level at which graft is a major industry in Mexico.

[1rudeboy]

You missed his point. It's not about outsourcing "border security." It's about outsourcing someone who sees if the cars are properly attached to each other.

[cinives]

No, I believe they inspect the contents of the car and the seals on the cars at the Border.

Do you think the Mexicans will check for the presence of illegals or drugs, or worse ? Do you think those Mexicans won't take bribes for smuggling, or succumb to the threat of violence from those in Mexico who have an illegal cargo to get across ? Shoot, we can't even keep our union guys from pilfering, so why do you think we can keep Mexican workers attentive to American national security ?

I don't think it's possible.

[1rudeboy]

You "believe?" Have you ever bothered to find out?

[CharlesWayneCT]

No, the specific issue that was being discussed was SAFETY inspections, which mostly ensure that the brake lines are working and are properly attached and that the brakes are not stuck on.

Nobody wants their train brakes catching fire, so they are pretty good about making sure this inspection goes well.

One railroad has ONE train that starts in Mexico, and runs directly to a place in the United States with no stops, and therefore no connecting/disconnecting additional railroad cars. But current regulations require that this train stop at the border and get a safety inspection by american union crews. This slows down the train, costs a lot of money paid for the 2nd inspection, and clogs up the border (slowing down more trains).

This has nothing to do with inspecting cargo.

And it illustrates the advantage of working together. If we can ensure that the safety inspection checklists are the same in Mexico, America, and Canada, we don't have to inspect everything everytime it crosses the border.

Just as, if we had common car regulations, you could import a car from Europe without having to jump through hoops and spend thousands on "upgrades".